EWATTC SCHOOL. 343 alone admilted, was altogether removed from the senses and di> vested of sensible properties, so as to be conceived only as an Ens Rationis, and described and discussed only in the most gen- eral words of the language. The exposition given by Parmenides in his poem, 1 though complimented by Plato, was vehemently controverted by others, who deduced from it many contradictions and absurdities. As a part of his reply, and doubtless the strong- est part, Parmenides retorted upon his adversaries ; an example followed by his pupil Zeno with still greater acuteness and suc- cess. Those who controverted his ontological theory, that the real, ultra-phenomenal substance was One, affirmed it to be not One, but Many ; divisible, movable, changeable, etc. Zeno attacked this latter theory, and proved that it led to contradic- tions and absurdities still greater than those involved in the proposition of Parmenides. 2 He impugned the testimony of sense, affirming that it furnished premises for conclusions which con- tradicted each other, and that it was unworthy of trust. 3 Parmen- ides 4 had denied that there was any such thing as real change either of place or color: Zeno maintained change of place, or motion, to be impossible and self-contradictory ; propounding many logical difficulties, derived from the infinite divisibility of matter, against some of the most obvious affirmations respecting sensible phenomena. Melissus appears to have argued in a vein similar to that of Zeno, though with much less acuteness ; demon- strating indirectly the doctrine of Parmenides, by deducing im- possible inferences from the contrary hypothesis. 5 1 Plato, Parmenides, p. 128, B. ai) fisv (Parmenides) yap ev role UO.GIV EV <j>ric Eivdt Tb iruv, Kdi TOVTUV reKfiqpia irape^eif KaXuf re xal ev, etc.
- See the remarkable passage in the Parmenides of Plato, p. 128, B, C, D.
6e TO -JE u^.rj&lf (3off&eiu Tif ravra TU ypu.ftp.aTa rip TlapfiEviSov Taf avrbv KUftydelv, uf el tv taTi, TroAAu nal ysl.ola T Aoyw nal evuvrca avT(f>. 'AvTiTieyet 6r) ovv TOVTO rd irpbf rot)f ri noh.'h.a /.eyovraf, nal avTaTroditiuai TavTa ical IT X E I u , TOVTO ftovXo/ievov drjhoiv, <Z>c i T i y eAo LO T E pa IT do %o i uv ai/Tuv t) vnodeaif ij el iro/LAi iariv ?/ ij TOV ev elvai, 3 Plato, Phffidrus, c. 44, p. 261, D. See the citations in Brandis, Gcsch. icr Gr. Rom. Philosophic, part i, p. 417, seq. 4 Parmcnid. Fragm. T, 101, cd. Mulloch. See the Fragments of Mclissus collected by Mullach, in his publicatioi cited in a previous note, p. 81 ; tcq.
